MediaWiki talk:Citoid-citoidtool-title/fr

Suite à une discussion sur le Bistro, je me permets de mettre ici les liens vers les discussions précédentes :

• Citer → Référence ? (2014)
• Proposition de changement de traduction : Citer vs Référence (2015-2016), suite à laquelle le terme a été changé en "Source"
• w:fr:Wikipédia:Le Bistro/23 mai 2016#Éditeur visuel : renommer le bouton « Citer »
• w:fr:Wikipédia:Le Bistro/9 mai 2019#Disparition du bouton "Source" de la barre d'éditeur visuel
• w:fr:Wikipédia:Le Bistro/18 septembre 2019#Sources dans l'éditeur visuel.
• Discussion du 23 septembre 2019 : w:fr:Wikipédia:Le_Bistro/23_septembre_2019#Sourcer, référencer, citer : on recommence le débat.

Posting those links here without having them displayed in the resources to translate serves nothing. And all these are debatable: the tlak on French Wikipedia only is invalid without informing other wikis (including outside Wikimedia) that use these translations for Mediawiki in general or its addons, not made specifically for Wikipedia (and also used in Wikimedia outside Fr.Wikipedia, e.g. on Commons or Meta). If you don't post relevant links, nobody else can know this "private" decision made by a few users in a temporary talk page (not even directly relevant to this topic but where people discuss lot of things related for French Wikipedia, in pages that are archived each day and closed, and become immediately invisible the next day). Note that there's a French portal on this wiki: you can add a relevant terminology subpage to document these discussions (and also allow other users from other wikis to participate).

This is a clear lack of efficient cooperation across wikis, only a few users kwow in their head what is happening. And it's very bad for people in Wikipedia then blaming other users (without notifying them even if they have a Fr.Wikipedia account and an account on this wiki) about these kinds of "problems" and then send flows of personal insults (I did not make anything wrong, I just followed what this wiki indicated and the fact that the resource was marked fuzzy (without any detail) and also not reviewed. I sued the standard way of working on this wiki. I discovered my name very late.

The French "Bistro" is definitely not a reference for policies or decisions, it is impossible to search anything from it as there's no relevant topic to track them. The proof being that there was no link allowing to trace of temporary talks in 2014, 2015, May 2016, and May 2019. Each time these talks were forgotten in the limbs !

Note that the only thing that translators/reviewers see in the Translatewiki page is the content of the "/qqq" subpage which lists:

Messages identiques : [modifier cette liste]

Cite-ve-toolbar-group-label (« Citer »)

Citethispage-change-submit (« Citer »)

Proveit-proveit-cite-button (« Citer »)

And say exactly that these translations should be identical; there's no pointer that there could be different interpretations depending on context of use. And if you look at all other translations to other languages they never make any difference. So this is a specific decision made in fr.Wikipedia for fr.wikipedia only and not relevant for this translatewiki.net site and all other wikis (including Commons, Meta, fr.wikisource, fr.wikiversity, wikia...).

If fr.wikipêdia wants its own translation it can adopt it by making the page containing it in the MediaWiki namespace locked (so that it won't be overwritten by bot-imports from translatewiki.net). But fr.wikipedia must then design a tracking page for these distinct translations they want locally (so that they can monitor later changes in MediaWiki, e.g. if the source English is later modified with some variant, formatting, placeholders, or different presentation using longer and less ambiguous expressions...).

But this talk page is not displayed at all and nothing is given in the translation tool on Translatewikinet. The "/qqq" page should then display a terminology warning for translations in specific languages (this suggests adding a template to insert in the "/qqq" page that would allow displaying these links conditionally, language by language (the "/qqq" page is the same for all target languages, and generally written in English or just autotranslated in the UI language, not in the target language of the translation tool)

Several messages in the last discussion are opposed to the conservation of the verb "Citer". If you want to cancel the translation again, it is probably your right since TranslateWiki probably does not have the same common rules than the Wikimedia Fondation wikis. I'm not going to organize an interwiki survey to translate a single word: I'm not a fan of procédurites. All I know is that contributors have indicated that the change was not appropriate and some were looking for the new button to source... However, the frwiki (french speaking) community will not keep this false friend if it's kept and will override it. Best regards.

frwikipedia can still keep its choice; technically, all they have to do is to apply their prefered form in their local "MediaWiki namespace and block it to be overriden by bot imports. For me this decision is purely local to frwiki, and I should have not been blamed on frwiki for applying a correct translation. If frwiki want to have their prefered translation given, they should indicate it in the "/qqq" doc page with a link to their decision (actually never done by a real procedure but decided by very few admin users in an informal talk page archived rapidly and impossible to find later. They complain this was discussed multiple times, but the change to "citer" was made multiple times by users that were never able to locate their decision or discuss it seriously (these discussions have a very short lifetime: 1 day only, and hidden within a mass of messages for any topics in frwikipedia). It's up to frwikipedia to create their own translation support tracking page, and keep a record of their past decision (which are not necessarily the best as there are other options they never thought about). Such tracking is up to those admins to do so they will track when changes will be needed (because they will lock their current choice and will not allow any new value being imported from translatewiki.net).

The "false friend" is in fact a false argument. "source" is as much ambiguous as "cite" if they are used alone, the real meaning is when associating both: for English and all other languages, "cite" is considered enough, but a few frwikipedia admins think that "source" alone is enough. We have various places where "source" would be ambiguous (look at the discussion about how "wikitext" or "source" are used and translated with different meanings, including source of information, source language of translation, source document, source author... the context of use is not clear; even for the use of the label in templates which are used by tempaltes like Template:Cite and tools like Citoid, both being named in French using "cite" and not "source").

It's very unfortunate because all other languages have not made this decision (including for other regional languages of France, and the only opinions were those expressed by frwikipedia admins in France, that actually don't participate a lot to translations and do not care about consistency, even in frwikipedia itself, or don't take the time to signal to translators that they have another opinion). They blamed me publicly in their "Bistro", but even forgot to contact me to signal they disagreed with it (and it was impossible for me to know that there was some earlier separate discussion visible only one day in the Bristro since several years, and not even conducted in an appropriate project page. I consider such public blame (with ad nominem attacks) very unfriendly and in fact opposed to normal rules of cooperation. And not all French tralators use French Wikipedia (they may work on other wikis and rarely visit the French Wikipedia to follow its "Bistro" full of uncategorized junks, and actually meant only to provide instant help to users but not support of the community at large and the long term).

We should include on this wiki a template we can use in "/qqq" to display specific translation guides for specific wikis in specific languages, and at least for specific languages even if the "/qqq" page is written mostly in English. But I've not found any way to have the "/qqq" subpages detect the target language used in the translation tool, so that such template would work. Now If we don't use such template, all translators in all languages will see comments relevant only to a specific wiki. If all wikis want to include their own notices, the "/qqq" pages will be hard to read and manage, too long and the notice will not even be displayed in the translation tool without forcing all users to scroll down the text to see that there are specific notices for specific wikis or languages.

And anyway translatewiki.net is not just for Wikipedia or Wikimedia; there are lot of other wikis using MediaWiki outside Wikimedia, and that still want to use the same base translations by default without being bound in their own sites (including commons, frwikisource, metawiki, and community wikis for specific regions) to the very specific frwikipedia rules imposed only by a few frwikipedia admins that have no privilege at all on other wikis.

Yes, a lot of wikis are using MediaWiki and frwiki is the biggest french speaking wiki : I think the community is in the best position to judge the translation and why it corresponds better. You can criticize the approach, but to this day, it's the most developed consensus. If you don't like the approach, you can start an interwiki survey and ask all contributors for their opinion of this translation. Personally, I don't have the time and energy to organize such a process.

No one insulted you, don't take this dispute for a personal matter: you proposed a translation and some contributors didn't agree... It happens. I initiated the discussion and notified you in the original message: if it didn't work, it's not my fault.

I don't understand the "/qqq" stuff, or rather how it's supposed to solve the disagreement. I would also like to point out that not only the administrators have commented on this question. Also, the frwiki rules don't define this translation: it's the usage that prevails. Finally, the word "source" is no longer used, but the verb "sourcer" is, since a verb is used in English.